Information on the thesis

The dissertation focuses on the multi-paradigmal contrastive analysis of the phraseological units (PhU) of spatial semantics in the Ukrainian and English languages. The purpose of the research is to elaborate the typology of PhU of spatial semantics that will contribute to specifying the peculiarities in their structure, semantics, ideographic classification and motivation, as well as extra-linguistic factors that caused them.

PhU are viewed as capable of performing nominative function fixed language units characterized by separability, reproducibility, semantic integrity of their components that have full or partial reinterpreted meaning.

In the conceptual system macroconcept SPACE consists of hyperconcepts OBJECT, PLACE, LOCALIZATION and MOTION. It is verbalized by a set of language units which are united by the functional-semantic category of locativity into the functional-semantic field. Spatial semantics is expressed by language units, verbalizing 1) the spatial characteristics of objects; 2) places; 3) localization of objects; 4) motion. The spatial phraseological units (SPhU) are those, in semantic structure of which the integral seme “space” is identified.

The procedure of the complex multi-paradigmal contrastive analysis of SPhU includes the following stages: (1) logical-semantic, (2) linguistic and (3) psycholinguistic ones. The main result of the research is the typology of SPhU, containing four classifications: ideographic, structural, semantic and motivational.

Phraseothematic field “Space” consists of four phraseothematic groups (“Motion”, “Localization”, “Object”, “Place”) that are more productive than their binary oppositions (“Anti-Motion”, “Anti-Localization”, “Anti-Object”, “Anti-Place”). In the compared languages phraseothematic group “Motion” demonstrates the most of SPhU. Differences are found mainly among qualitative characteristics of the thematic field “Space”. In the English phraseological system the structure of the field is more complex. There are synonymic paradigms denoting means and methods of transportation, directions of movement, goals and causes for moving, varieties of public places and institutions, roads, the location of the object in relation to absolute reference points.

The study of the structure of SPhU let subdivide them into two structural types: 1) SPhU with the structure of a phrase, which include verbal, adverbial, substantive and adjective classes and 2) SPhU with the structure of a sentence. The most numerous structural type is SPhU with the structure of a phrase. Within them verbal class is the most widespread in English, adverbial – in Ukrainian. The most productive syntactic models of SPhU coincide in all semantic-grammatical classes, except for the adjective one.

The analysis of semantics of SPhU distinguished among them 4 semantic types: procedural, qualitative-circumstantial, objective and attributive-predicative, each of which includes subtypes. English SPhU are characterized by a higher semantic diversity, since two semantic subtypes are lacunar in Ukrainian. The most productive semantic subtype is procedural SPhU denoting action.

The analysis of motivation of SPhU was carried out in relation to three criteria: status of motivator in the structure of knowledge about signified, rationality and precedence of information, which is the basis of onomasiological structures of SPhU.

According to the first criterion four types of motivation were identified, they are: propositional-dictumative, associative-terminal, integrative-comparative and mixed. Propositional-dictumative motivational type is the most productive. Associative-terminal and integrative-comparative types of motivation are based on the use of the signs of four donor zones (HUMAN, ARTEFACT, NATURFACT and BIOSPHERE) for the recipient zone SPACE. Mixed motivation is represented by 5 types, 4 of which involve modus (evaluation of spatial situations by nominators). In relation to rationality and precedence criteria, mythological and precedent motivational types were identified. They are both more common in the Ukrainian phraseological system.

Extra-linguistic factors that had impact on the formation of the found peculiarities are the geographic conditions of living of the ethnic groups, their historical destiny, social life, daily routine and way of life.

Key words: phraseological unit, spatial semantics, motivation, the Ukrainian language, the English language, classification, typology, contrastive linguistics, multi-paradigmal approach.